( 1 ) RULE nisi. Smt. Nanda Ramachander Rao took notice for the respondents. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition was heard finally and disposed of by this order.

( 2 ) THE petitioner currently is serving as Conductor in the APSRTC. Disciplinary proceedings are initiated against the petitioner and the charge-sheet was issued to him on 19-5-1999. On the same day, a separate order (suspension order) was issued placing the petitioner under suspension pending departmental enquiry. Hence, this writ petition assailing the validity of the charge-sheet dated 19-5-1999 and the suspension order dated 19-5-1999.

( 3 ) THE learned Counsel for the petitioner as sailing the validity of the charge-sheet as well as the suspension order would contend that the A. P. S. R. T. C. (CCanda) Conduct regulations as well as the APSRTC (CC and a) Regulations are not yet published in the a. P. Gazette and therefore those regulations have not yet come into force and therefore disciplinary proceedings initiated by the authorities of the APSRTC under those regulations as well as the suspension order issued by the disciplinary authority are without authority o